[djm2]

Your thoughts are solicited. For openers:

A doctrinaire belief in a position that can not be disproved, regardless of any evidence that is provided.

[AsherO]

Wirelessly posted

I disagree, what if this belief is harmless to anyone? I might be insane if I believe the sky is brown (although there is evidence to the contrary), but does that make me a terrorist?

[Damaged7]

Wirelessly posted (Bold 9000)

If you build bombs all day and don't tip your waitress... You might be a terrorist.

If you don't care about the news and steal your neighbors paper anyways... You might be a terrorist.

If you put canadian quarters in american vending machines... You might be a terrorist.

[test54]

If you are willing to kill or make threats of death to innocent people even if they are only considered innocent by your enemy or a third party.

This included bombing abortion clinics, the I.R.A, suicide bomber or even the people who threatened the octo mom & doctor with death.

[Dawg]

Originally Posted by test54

If you are willing to kill or make threats of death to innocent people even if they are only considered innocent by your enemy or a third party.

This included bombing abortion clinics, the I.R.A, suicide bomber or even the people who threatened the octo mom & doctor with death.

So are you calling all the American Soldiers terrorist? They are willing to kill innocent people even know they take precautions not to.

[JSanders]

Originally Posted by test54

If you are willing to kill or make threats of death to innocent people even if they are only considered innocent by your enemy or a third party.

That definition includes the abortion doctors.

[test54]

You two prove my point exactly. Its all in the perception, if one is thought to be a terrorist then they are. Now that doesn't mean that they are universally thought of as a terrorist but by definition if one causes terror then they are indeed a terrorist. The viewpoint can't be just personal, you have to see through other people's eyes or at least try. I believe that is a requirement of diplomacy.

although, Jsanders who are the doctors terrorizing? does the fetus have a conscious thought of its situation?
I love these philosophical questions. good thread djm.

[JSanders]

Originally Posted by test54

although, Jsanders who are the doctors terrorizing? does the fetus have a conscious thought of its situation?

Though many in the OB community might differ with you, let's suppose a fetus not have conscious thought of the situation, no differently than the 600 people were killed instantly by the initial impact of the aircraft on the WTC, most of who also had no conscious thought of the situation.

[test54]

but their actions caused terror among anyone that saw or was affected by the act. So I guess that would make the doctors terrorists only if they had that affect on surrounding people I guess. But I don't think they are terrorizing any fetus that has no cognitive thought or feelings. The act of feeling terror is what causes people to be terrorists, not necessarily an action.

[JSanders]

Originally Posted by test54

The act of feeling terror is what causes people to be terrorists, not necessarily an action.

lol. Cute.

[test54]

why is that cute? To terrorize someone involves perception, someone might not actually be a terrorist but if they are perceived that way then they are. Its up to those people to undue the perception.

[JSanders]

It's cute because you have taken to placing the burden of the label of terrorist upon the those terrorized, not those committing it.

I guess I didn't really mean cute, as much as I meant silly.

So, a thief is only a thief if those from which he steals actually perceives him as such? That would 'kill' the word 'murderer' since a dead person really can't perceive that he was murdered (dohhh, he's dead!).

It is a good thing that I can perceive a nutjob when I see one.

[test54]

i think your twisting my words. To be a terrorist you must be perceived as terrorizing someone. The burden of the label is upon the person doing the terrorizing, the person who is being terrorized cannot simply choose to stop.

The question was about terrorists but since you asked. The thief is a thief to both himself and those in any way associated with the acts. Outside of that the thief is an unknown and therefore cannot be labeled as a thief. This does not apply to terrorists generally because of the publicity. But if you ran into and Irish guy in town and he sounded nice, you would never know he could have been a bomber unless someone (himself maybe) told you.

The murderer is pretty easy and I already answered it because of the association with abortion and the idea of it being a murder. The label goes further than just to the victim, as above it goes to all that are associated with the story. Anyone that knows of the murder or the person responsible are then going to label the person a murderer. Anyone outside of it would have no reason to label the person because they would not know. Publicity brings those people into the situation where they would label the person a murderer.

So yes, if you know the story then you will label the party as you want. Its all about the perception, if you have no perception then there is no reason to label anyone. Same applies to terrorists.

And thanks for the personal insult, means a lot coming form a moderator. especially since it was unprovoked and I kept everything very civil in this thread.

[mriff]

Originally Posted by test54

And thanks for the personal insult, means a lot coming form a moderator. especially since it was unprovoked and I kept everything very civil in this thread.

It's apparently ok if he does it test.

[test54]

probably just delete the text anyways. Ah, its ok since its all in good spirit since I don't perceive him to be a jerk.

[JSanders]

It wasn't directed at you, specifically or generally. 'Twas just another example in the warped line of thinking. Odd that you perceived it as a personal insult.

[test54]

touche.

[mriff]

Odd that two of us percieved it the same way.

[JSanders]

[mriff]

An apology is not forthcoming test. I'm sure you're surprised.

It's funny JS. You malign others for being rude and condescending, but it's ok for you.